IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Arbitration Case No.750 of 2023 Decided on: 7th October, 2023 __________________________________________________________

Naresh Kumar Vij ....Petitioner Versus f National Highways Authority of India and others ……Respondents Coram u Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge

1 Whether approved for reporting? Yes.

For the petitioner: Mr. Ashok Sood, Senior Advocate with Mr. Abbhishek Banta, Advocate.

For the respondents: Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.1-NHAI.

Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent No.2-

UOI.

Mr. I.N. Mehta, Senior Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rohit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent No.3-State.

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

Ranjan Sharma, Judge (Oral)

Petitioner, Naresh Kumar Vij, has filed the instant petition with the following prayer:- P “It is, therefore, prayed that the petition may be allowed and the time, to pass the Arbitral Award, in Arbitration Petition No.345/2017, may kindly be ordered to be extended and the arbitration petition may also be ordered to be decided in time bound manner, convenient to the Ld. Divisional Commissioner-Cum- Arbitrator for National Highway Authority of India Shimla Division, HP Shimla most preferably within period of three months from the date of order of this Hon’ble Court.”

2. Facts in brief are that pursuant to Notification issued by the Central Government on 22.03.2012 for acquisition of land for National Highway under National Highways Act, 1956, acquisition proceedings were initiated.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that his land comprised in Khata/Khatouni No.77/90, Khasra No.1345/92, measuring 00-04-41 Hectares, situate in Mauja Chhakdyal, Tehsil and District Shimla (Rural) have been acquired by the respondent-National Highway Authority and the land Acquisition Collector-cum-Sub-Divisional Officer (Rural), Shimla, passed Award No.21 dated 12.10.2015., assessing the market value of acquired land of the petitioner at Rs.23,43,232/-.

4. Feeling aggrieved against the award, the petitioner filed Reference Petition under Section 3G (5) of the National Highways Act before the Arbitrator-cum-Divisional Commissioner Shimla Division, who started arbitral proceedings and the arbitral proceedings were continued in which the petitioner and the respondent-National Highways Authority of India participated.

5. During the pendency of arbitral proceedings in 157 cases alongwith the case of the present petitioner, the H Arbitrator passed an order dated 13.03.2023, to the effect that the award in the arbitral proceedings was to be passed within a period of twelve months under Section 29A (1) and within the extended period of six months thereafter in terms of Section 29A (3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (for short ‘the Act’), but in the instant case, since the arbitral proceedings have continued beyond the normal period and even the extended period i.e. the total of eighteen months period, therefore, the mandate of the Arbitrator stood terminated under Section 29A (4) of the Act. . In addition to this, while passing orders dated 13.03.2023, the Arbitrator directed that the proceedings were closed and these proceedings can be re-opened only after orders of the Appropriate Court were obtained under Section 29A (5) of the Act. The parties were also granted an opportunity to proceed further under Section 29A (5) of the Act.

6. We have considered the matter in entirety and it is borne out from the records that non-completion of the arbitral proceedings within the period of twelve months under Section 29A (1) and extended period of six months thereafter under Section 29A (3) of the Act was attributable to the inaction of H the Arbitrator for non-completion of arbitral proceedings. In this background, once the proceedings were delayed due to administrative reasons or on account of COVID and post- COVID effects, therefore, the petitioner ca